A network-based approach to coauthorship credit allocation

We introduce and evaluate a novel network-based approach for determining individual credit of coauthors in multi-authored papers. In the proposed model, coauthorship is conceptualized as a directed, weighted network, where authors transfer coauthorship credits among one another. We validate the model by fitting it to empirical data about authorship credits from economics, marketing, psychology, chemistry, and biomedicine. Also, we show that our model outperforms prior alternatives such as fractional, geometric, arithmetic, and harmonic counting in generating coauthorship credit allocations that approximate the empirical data. The results from the empirical evaluation as well as the model’s capability to be adapted to domains with different norms for how to order authors per paper make the proposed model a robust and flexible framework for studying substantive questions about coauthorship across domains.

[1]  M. Newman Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  Nils T. Hagen,et al.  Harmonic Allocation of Authorship Credit: Source-Level Correction of Bibliometric Bias Assures Accurate Publication and Citation Analysis , 2008, PloS one.

[3]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  Social Network Analysis , 2011, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[4]  Charles Oppenheim Fractional counting of multiauthored publications , 1998 .

[5]  Bing He,et al.  Mining patterns of author orders in scientific publications , 2012, J. Informetrics.

[6]  Erica Frank,et al.  Significance of Authorship Position: An Open-Ended International Assessment , 2011, The American journal of the medical sciences.

[7]  Duncan Lindsey,et al.  Production and Citation Measures in the Sociology of Science: The Problem of Multiple Authorship , 1980 .

[8]  Ana Marušić,et al.  A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines , 2011, PloS one.

[9]  Peter Vinkler,et al.  Research contribution, authorship and team cooperativeness , 2005, Scientometrics.

[10]  Patrice Laget,et al.  Is correspondence reflected in the author position? A bibliometric study of the relation between corresponding author and byline position , 2011, Scientometrics.

[11]  M Dym,et al.  Gossypol: effect on testosterone. , 1981, Science.

[12]  Norman P. Hummon,et al.  Connectivity in a citation network: The development of DNA theory☆ , 1989 .

[13]  Nils T. Hagen,et al.  Harmonic publication and citation counting: sharing authorship credit equitably – not equally, geometrically or arithmetically , 2009, Scientometrics.

[14]  John Scott What is social network analysis , 2010 .

[15]  T. Keats,et al.  On multiple authorship. , 1996, Skeletal radiology.

[16]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  The pure h-index: calculating an author’s h- index by taking co-authors into account , 2007 .

[17]  Dangzhi Zhao,et al.  Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts , 2007, ASIST.

[18]  K. Brad Wray,et al.  The Epistemic Significance of Collaborative Research , 2002, Philosophy of Science.

[19]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[20]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  In those fields where multiple authorship is the rule, the h-index should be supplemented by role-based h-indices , 2010, J. Inf. Sci..

[21]  Marie Diener-West,et al.  Results of an Academic Promotion and Career Path Survey of Faculty at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine , 2004, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[22]  Dan Ariely,et al.  Research Note - The Researcher as a Consumer of Scientific Publications: How Do Name-Ordering Conventions Affect Inferences About Contribution Credits? , 2009, Mark. Sci..

[23]  J. Moody The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network: Disciplinary Cohesion from 1963 to 1999 , 2004 .

[24]  Robert D. Tollison,et al.  Intellectual Collaboration , 2000, Journal of Political Economy.

[25]  Guido Van Hooydonk Fractional Counting of Multiauthored Publications: Consequences for the Impact of Authors , 1997, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[26]  I. Lukovits,et al.  Correct credit distribution: A model for sharing credit among coauthors , 1995 .

[27]  Elizabeth Wager,et al.  Recognition, reward and responsibility: why the authorship of scientific papers matters. , 2009, Maturitas.

[28]  Scott M Wright,et al.  Looking forward to promotion: characteristics of participants in the Prospective Study of Promotion in Academia. , 2003, Journal of general internal medicine.

[29]  J. S. Long,et al.  Testing Structural Equation Models , 1993 .

[30]  M. Newman,et al.  The structure of scientific collaboration networks. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  An empirical analysis of the use of alphabetical authorship in scientific publishing , 2012, J. Informetrics.

[32]  Xiaojun Hu,et al.  Loads of special authorship functions: Linear growth in the percentage of "equal first authors" and corresponding authors , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[33]  Jian Du,et al.  Perceptions of author order versus contribution among researchers with different professional ranks and the potential of harmonic counts for encouraging ethical co-authorship practices , 2012, Scientometrics.

[34]  R. Dellavalle,et al.  The write position , 2007, EMBO reports.

[35]  James W. Endersby Collaborative research in the social sciences : Multiple authorship and publication credit , 1996 .

[36]  Vroni Retzer,et al.  Towards objectivity in research evaluation using bibliometric indicators – A protocol for incorporating complexity , 2009 .

[37]  Rodrigo Costas,et al.  Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective , 2011, Scientometrics.

[38]  Tang Xiaoli,et al.  Perceptions of author order versus contribution among researchers with different professional ranks and the potential of harmonic counts for encouraging ethical co-authorship practices , 2013, Scientometrics.

[39]  Chun-Ting Zhang,et al.  A proposal for calculating weighted citations based on author rank , 2009, EMBO reports.

[40]  Hui Fang,et al.  Fairly sharing the credit of multi-authored papers and its application in the modification of h-index and g-index , 2011, Scientometrics.

[41]  Leo Egghe,et al.  Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries: Consequences for evaluation studies , 2000, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[42]  Nils T. Hagen,et al.  Harmonic coauthor credit: A parsimonious quantification of the byline hierarchy , 2013, J. Informetrics.

[43]  Stephen Cole,et al.  Social Stratification in Science , 1974 .

[44]  M. Hochberg,et al.  Author Sequence and Credit for Contributions in Multiauthored Publications , 2007, PLoS biology.

[45]  G D Lundberg,et al.  The order of authorship: who's on first? , 1990, JAMA.

[46]  M. Browne,et al.  Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit , 1992 .

[47]  Héctor Guerrero,et al.  A robust formula to credit authors for their publications , 2004, Scientometrics.

[48]  P. Blau Exchange and Power in Social Life , 1964 .